Why did CA agree to a jungle primary? Makes no f**king sense.

[Yavin4]

Can someone please explain that to me? The whole concept of a jungle primary makes no damn sense.

[SoCalDem]

1. Schwarzeneggar

'nuff said..

But it did finally rid us of Mary Bono./


The reason it can be problematic is because everyone who decides to run, thinks THEY will win and too many participate..(That's why we got Trump)

It COULD work if two weeks after filing to run, there is a poll done and anyone not in double digits HAS to drop out.. well before ballots get printed..

[SoCalNative]

3. Or the number of candidates per party

allowed on the ballot is 2. Period.

[TexasBushwhacker]

7. Or they could have ranked voting/instant run off

You vote for 2 candidates, your first choice and your second choice. If your first choice isn't in the top 2, then your second choice is counted. That way you can "vote your conscience" for a dark horse for your first choice, without feeling you've wasted your vote.

[former9thward]

11. Ahh no.

He supported it but so did the Democrats in the legislature. The legislature put Prop 14 on the ballot and the voters approved it. It was praised on this board at the time.

[Hamlette]

2. it's like communism, works in the abstract

I think dems were behind it in CA. Then if you get one dud on the general ballot, you have another Dem to vote for.

Doesn't work out so well, as we just saw.

Needs tweaking.

[BigmanPigman]

4. Needs a major over hall!

I hate voting using a slide rule...I felt like Steve Kornacki (sp?) yesterday with all of my charts and rough lists and calculators trying to plot out who had the best shot as a block to a GOP candidate. Completely ridiculous.

[grantcart]

6. Are you kidding? We blocked the Republicans from getting on the GE in1 Senate race and

10 Congressional Districts.

It appears that the Republicans have blocked the Democrats in 1.


There are lots of benefits in not having Republicans at the top of the ballot but the bottom line financial savings is probably $ 200 million.

[grantcart]

5. i could understand this kind of thread before the results yesterday but really?

Yesterday there were 53 Congressional races and 1 Senate Race

In 42 Congressional races there will be one Democrat and one Republican on the GE ballot

In 10 congressional races and the Senate race there will be two Democrats and no Republicans on the GE ballot

In 1 Congressional race there will be 2 Republicans and no Democrats.


Eliminating Republicans from state wide races is a major achievement. Not only does it save hundreds of millions of dollars it also a) has a negative impact on enthusiasm down ballot turnout for the Republicans b) eliminates the possibility of an October surprise eliminating the front runner and let the seat go to a Republican and c) takes a way a huge platform for a Republican candidate to get his name recognition up and build a donor base etc.

It would have been even better if we had gotten the Gov race as well.

We have just won 10 GE races. The Republicans won 1, how is that not a big victory.

Even in the deep red districts we will run candidates and force them to spend money. In Nunes district 98% of the contributions are from outside the state. That means that Republicans outside of California are sending money to defend a "safe seat". On the other hand we have 11 races where Democrats can send money to other swing districts.

Last night proved that the jungle primary works well. In NO race that is targeted for a possible switch were the Dems shut out by too many candidates. In the CA 49 (Issa's district), for example the Dems took 2,3 and 4th.

Only the CA 8, which is a very red pro Trump district where the incumbent won by 63% were the Republicans able to get both the first and second spot, and only by a few hundred votes.

It was a very good result last night and the benefits (which are great) outweighed the risk (which were small and manageable).

[mercuryblues]

10. great

analysis. If the media would portray this as you did, the hand wringing here would stop. How is having 11 seats out of 53 a sure dem seat and 43 races in play. With some of them considered safe and/or lean Dem a bad thing?

Out of 53 seats only 1 is a safe R. That is bad how?


The republikkklans, with the media's help is spinning this into a negative. You know why? Because the republikkklans are getting shut out of too many races. They want Liberals to hate this.

[samir.g]

8. Incumbent protection

[MattP]

9. Agree? It was voted on by proposition if you can get 50 plus to agree on anything it's law

We got prop 187 that way and it ended the Republican party in this state